OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAMRUP,GUWAHATI
C.C.130/09
Present:-
1)Md.Sahadat Hussain, A.J.S. - President
2)Sri U.N.Deka - Member
1) Mr. Dimbo Dhar Das -Complainant
S/O-Late Basanta Kumar Das
2) Ms.Krishna Das
W/O- Mr.Dimbo Dhar Das
3) Ms.Kakalee Das
D/O-Mr.Dimbo Dhar Das
4) Ms. Kangkana Das
D/O-Mr. Dimbo Dhar Das
All are residents of Opp. Bye Lane,
Borthakur Clinic, H/No-69,
Kharghuli,Guwahati,Dist-Kamrup,Assam
-vs-
1.Jet Airways (India )Ltd., - Opp.parties
S.M.Center,Andheri Kurla Road,
Andheri( East),Mumbai,Maharastra-400059
( Represented by its Chairman)
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Jet Airways (India )Ltd.,
S.M.Center,Andheri Kurla Road,Andheri( East),
Mumbai,Maharastra-400059
3. Jet Airways (India )Ltd.,
H/No-19, First Floor, Md. Tayebullah Road,
Dighalipukhuri( East), Guwahati-781001,Kamrup,Assam
4. Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd., B-21, Infor City ,Near Hero Honda Chowk,
Phase-ii,Sector-34, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001
(Represented by its Chairman/ Managing Director)
5. The Chief Executive Officer,Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd.,
B-21, Infor City ,Near Hero Honda Chowk,
Phase-ii,Sector-34, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001
6. Jet Lite (India) Ltd. C/O- Jet Airways (I).Ltd., Jet Air House ,
13 Community Centre ,Yusuf Sarani,Delhi-49
7. The Vice President,Corporate Communications & Public Relations,
Jet Lite (I).Ltd., C/O- Jet Airways (I) Ltd, Air House ,
13 Community Centre , Yusuf Sarani,Delhi-49
8. Jet Lite (India) Ltd., L.G.B International Airport ,
Borjhar ,Guwahati-15,Kamrup,Guwahati
Appearance-
Learned advocate Ms. Indrani Mazumdar for the complainant.
Learned advocate Mr. Talat Hamid Hazarika for opp.party-4 & 5.
Date of argument- 15.9.2016
Date of judgment- 30.9.2016
This is a complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
1) The complaint was admitted on 9.12.09 and notices were served upon the opp.parties and Opp.Party No.1,2,3 , 4 and 5 filed their written statements . Originally the Opp.Party No.6,7,8 were not in the complaint , but they were impleded as party vide this forum’s order dtd. 6.9.2010. Opp.Party No.6,7,8 also filed their written statement on 22.6.11 , but the names of Opp.party No.1,2 & 3 were struck out vide this forums’ order dated 19.7.2013. The complainant filed his evidence in affidavit and he was also cross examined by the ld counsel of Opp.Party No.6,7,8 on 5.8.14 and also by the counsel of Opp.Party No.4 & 5 on 7.11.14. Opp.Party No.4 & 5 declined to adduce evidence of their own informing the forum the matter on 3.3.15. Opp.Party No.6,7,8 filed evidence of one Zakir Hussain in affidavit in support of their case , but on the prayer of Opp.Party No.6,7,8, the evidence of Zakir Hussain was expunged allowing them to file evidence of their proposed witness of Sri P.Sewar vide this forum’s order dated 20.1.2016, but they failed to file his evidence and for their default to appear in the dates fixed, the case against them was directed to proceed on exparte vide order dated 26.5.2016. Thereafter , ld advocate, Mrs.Indrani Mazumder filed written argument for the complainant and ld advocate Mr.Talat Hamid Hazarika filed written argument for Opp.Party No.4 & 5, and finally on 15.9.16 we have heard oral argument of ld advocate Mrs. Indrani Mazumder for the complainant and of ld advocate Mr. Talat Hamid Hazarika for Opp.Party No. 4 & 5, and today we deliver judgment which is as below:
2)The gist of the pleading of the complainant’s is that the Complainant No.1 along with Complainant No.2,3 &4 ( the wife and two daughters) decided to visit Port-Blair in the month of Sep,2009 and made enquiry through enquiry on 4.5.2009 through Yatra Online Ltd. about flight for their said journey ,and found that confirmed air tickets in the flight of Jet lite company for the journey from Port- Blair to Kolkata on 20.9.2009 were available and accordingly he booked four confirmed tickets for the journey from Kolkata to Port-Blair on 20.9.2009 and another four tickets (confirmed tickets) for the journey from Port-Blair to Kolkata on 28.9.2009 and paid Rs.26,186’04/- the cost of the tickets through his credit card bearing No. 9219 vide invoice No.A1/09-10/2283781 dtd. 4.5.2009 for the said confirmed tickets in the Jet Lite Flight No.S2-319 bearing ticket No. S2/ ETKT 705 3533484308 to 3533484311 for the journey on 20.9.09 from Kolkata to Port-Blair ;and vide Invoice No.A1/09-10/2283779 dtd.4.5.2009 amounting to Rs. 22,567.50 for confirmed air tickets in Jet Lite flight No. S2 320 of Jet Airways (India) Ltd. bearing tickets No. S2/ETKT 705 3533484312 to 3533484315 for the journey on 28.9.2009 from Port-Blair to Kolkata and he collected the copies of the said invoice and air tickets and Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. Opp.Party NO.4 & 5 collected an amount of Rs.48,754/- (Rupees forty eight thousand seven hundred fifty four)only mentioned in both the invoice dtd. 4.5.2009 from his account in the State Bank of India against the said credit card on 4.5.2009 itself. Thereafter, on 22.7.2009 while making enquiry in the web-site viz.www.yatraonline.com of the Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. he found confirmed air tickets in Goindigo flight of Indigo Airways for the journey from guwahati to Kolkata were available on 19.9.2009 and confirmed air tickets in Air India Flight of Indian Airlines for the journey from Kolkata to Guwahati on 28.9.2009 were available and he immediately booked four confirmed tickets for journey from Guwahati to Kolkata on 19.9.2009 and another four confirmed tickets for journey from Kolkata to Guwahati on 28.9.2009 in their names and collected said confirmed tickets in their name in the said web-sites itself and paid the cost of the said tickets through his SBI credit card bearing NO. 9219 vide Invoice No. A/1/09-10/2553667 dtd. 22.7.2009 amounting to Rs.8,520/- for the confirmed tickets in Goindigo flight No. 6E/2009 bearing ticket No. 03 J 43N-1 to 4 for journey on 19.9.2009 from Guwahati to Kolkata and vide Invoice No. A1/09-10-255 3676 dtd. 22.7.09 amounting to Rs. 11,318.06 for the confirmed tickets in Air India Flight No. IC/7729 bearing ticket No. 4796945435 to 4796945438 for journey on 28.9.2009 from Kolkata to Guwahati and collected the tickets from the said web-sites and Jatra Online Pvt. Ltd. collected Rs.19,838/- i.e. total sum amounts of the both invoice from his account at State Bank of India against the said credit card on 22.7.2009 itself. Thereafter on 19.9.2009 all the complainants has reached Kolkata by GoIndigo flight and stayed at Kolkata at guest house of Kolkata against the payment of Rs.2,000/- and on 20.9.2009 while they reported to Kolkata airport for their journey from Kolkata to Port Blair, the officials of the Jet Lite Airways informed them that their tickets were cancelled and official handed over a sheet containing massage addressed to Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. to Confirm the status of the said air tickets, however, no response was received from the Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. in that regard and as such they cancelled the said air tickets. Thenafter they requested to sent them to Jet Airways Ltd. to Port Blair any how, but they refused to extend any co-operation and the Jet Lite (Flight No.S 2319) took off leaving them stranded at Kolkata airport and then they requested the official of Jet Airways to arrange four confirmed tickets from Kolkata to come back home, but they refused to co-operate and under the said circumstances they had to stay at Kolkata till 28.9.2009 unnecessarily spending huge amount of money, so that they can come back to Guwahati by the Air India Flight against the ticket they had already purchased ;and they stayed in Assam Government Circuit House with effect from 20.9.2009 to 25.9.2009 against payment of Rs.3,900/- and in Aafreen Tower for the period from 25.9.09 to 28.9.09 against payment of Rs.3,600/- and they had to incur such cost for the fault of the opp.parties and finally they reached Guwahati by Air India Flight on 28.9.2009. Thereafter, Complainant No.1 through a Face-Mail informed Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. regarding such trouble and requested them to make an enquiry as to who has cancelled the confirmed air tickets without knowledge of them, but the latter did not response and then Complainant No.1 again vide his e.mail dtd. 29.9.2009 informed Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. about such trouble and requested them to inform back as to who would compensate them with the cost of cancellation of air ticket; and the latter informed Complainant No.1 through e.mail with a stamped copies of cancelled air tickets from Jet Airways India Ltd. as Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd.is the ticket agent of said Jet Airways India Ltd.. Thereafter Complainant No.1 received a communication dtd. 6.10.2009, sent through e.mail ,whereby the Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. requested him to provide some time to look into the matter and also vide another communication dtd. 14.10.2009 through e.mail requested him to send hard copies of cancelled air tickets bearing original stamp; and then he informed them vide communication dtd. 15.10.2009, through e.mail , he had sent said air tickets to Mrs.Ashneet Kaur as she requested them to send the tickets. Thereafter, Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. sent communication dtd. 16.10.2009, dtd. 27.10.09, dtd.4.11.09, dtd.13.11.09 through e.mail to him only to kill time on some frivolous grounds and finally denied to settle the claim. For the cancellation of the tickets they suffered from physical and mental agony and also suffered from mental agony for non-receipt of response from Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. and hence, both Jet Airways India Ltd. and Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. are liable to compensate them. Accordingly they pray to direct the opp.parties to refund the cost of air tickets which are -
1) Cost of air tickets purchased for journey on 19.9.2009
From Guwahati to Kolkata- -Rs.8,520.00
2) Cost of air tickets purchased for journey on 20.9.2009
From Kolkata to Port Blair- - Rs.26,186.00
3) Cost of air tickets purchased for journey on 28.9.2009
From Port Blair to Kolkata- - Rs. 22,567.00
4) Cost of air tickets purchased for journey on 28.9.2009
From Kolkata to Port Guwahati- - Rs.11,318.00
5) Cost of rooms for 10 (ten) nights at Kolkata w.e.f.19.9.09
to 28.9.09 -Rs. 9,500.00
6) Cost of Fooding for 10 (ten ) days at Kolkata for 4 persons-Rs.16,800.00
7) Taxi Fare and local conveyance - Rs. 3,980.00
8) Loss of 10 days leave salary of the Complainant No.1 -Rs.17,581.00
along with interest @ 14.5% Rs.5,436/- (Rupees five thousand four hundred thirty six) only and also to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing mental and physical pain to all the complainants by their act of deficiency of service towards them.
3) The pleading of the Opp.party No.1,2 & 3 is not required to be discussed in this proceeding having their names were struck off from this proceeding vide order dtd. 19.7.2013 .
4) The pleading of Opp.Party No.4 & 5 is that there is no cause of action for filing this complaint by complainant. The complainant booked the tickets through their central office situated at Gurgaon which is outside the territory of this forum and as such this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint. There is no deficiency of service on their part towards the complainant. They have also no branch at Kamrup and as such this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint . The transaction completed on the computer and telephone system of the opp.party which are located outside the territory of this forum as such this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint . As per “ User Agreement – Acceptance of terms “ (Annex-1) all this disputes arising with shall be subject to exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts at Gurgaon, Haryana. The expenditure incurred by the complainant was on the own volition of the complainant and not on account of any advise or request from their side. They are not responsible for cancellation of the tickets as alleged . As the tickets were confirmed by Opp.Party No.1,2 & 3, they duly make the payment of entire amount to Opp.Party No.1,2 & 3 after deducting their commission and Opp.Party NO.1,2,3 duly confirmed the tickets on 4th May 2009 itself. Once a ticket is confirmed, it remains confirm without any further requirement to confirm. The history sheet of the tickets has been derived from technology provided and made accessible by Opp.Party No.1,2,3 themselves and the said history sheet , it is mentioned that the tickets were duly confirmed on 4th May,2009 and it also captures the names of all complainants, and their e.mail ID and mobile phone numbers and the status of ticket as (“TK OK 4MAYO9“ which speaks with the tickets is to confirmed on 4th May 2009 itself and hence there was no further need for them to do further quary about confirm of the tickets. Opp.Party No.1 to 3 cited two separate reasons for cancellation of tickets-
“First reason is an alleged duplicacy of the tickets (“BKNG XXLD) as dupe with GVTZSY” meaning booking cancelled as it is duplicate with another confirmed booking bearing No.GVTZSY). It is submitted that they have no idea whatsoever as to what alleged duplicacy (“dupe”) are, Opp.Party No.1 to 3 relying upon , and the same may be put to strict test and demanded a suitable explanation . Even assuming for the sake of argument that the complainants had for some unexplained reason got duplicate bookings in their names, then too ,there was no reason for O.P. No.s 1 to 3 to cancel the ticket without first contacting/informing the complainants and them . Further, if the O.P.Nos. 1 to 3 themselves admit that there was indeed a duplicate booking, then they should have allowed the complainants to board the flight on at-least one of the tickets.
Second reason given is that they apparently did not reply to the message of rescheduling, that was issued by O.P.Nos. 1 to 3 (NO RPLY TO QQ MSG”). It is submitted that it is preposterous for O.P.Nos.1 to 3 to use this as an excuse for cancelling the ticket, because O.P.Nos.1 to 3 have a duty to report any change of schedule directly to the complainant. In any event, even otherwise, if the fight itself was being rescheduled, then why was there any need to cancel the tickets ? In the case of rescheduling , all that is required is to intimate the complainants about such rescheduling, but certainly there was no need to cancel the tickets.” Opp.Party NO.1,2,3 cancelled the tickets at their end without having received any instruction from the complainants and without any act of omission attributed to
them (Opp.Party No.4,5) . The complainants could have booked in another flight or could have returned to Guwahati by train or by road journey and as such, there stay at Kolkata for eight days is not justified one. They are not responsible for the cancellation of the tickets or in the delay in refund the money to the complainants. Even tickets were cancelled by Opp.Party No.1, 2 & 3 and they are not jointly and severally liable to return the money to the complainants. As per agreement Opp.Party No.4 & 5 act as a booking agent on behalf of 3rd party service provider, it shall have not any liability whatsoever for any aspect of arrangement between the service provider and the user as regards the standard of service provided by the service providers and they are not liable for service provider. The maximum liability on the part of them in respect of any service availed shall be limit up-to maximum of the refund of total amount received from the customer for availing the services less any cancellation, refund or their charges as may be applicable and in no case the liability shall included any consequential loss, damage, or additional expense whatsoever. The complainant , on their own volition visited through website, but they did not subsequently invites them to visit their website. The loss claimed by the complainants, consequently, remote and indirect are liable to be rejected and the expenses were of nature which complainants would incurred in any case while on holiday. The compensation claimed bears no nexus to the alleged cause of action and as such , such claim is unjust. The complaint is liable to be dismissed .
5) The pleading of Opp.Party No.6,7,8 in brief is that they have no any place of business within the jurisdiction of this forum nor the alleged cause of action had risen within the territorial jurisdiction of this forum and as such this forum is devoid of territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the instant complaint. The tickets got cancelled due to non-confirmation of the tickets by Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. (Opp.Party No.4 &5). The alleged denial of boarding to place at Kolkata Airport and as such, the cause of action is in Kolkata, not in Guwahati. The condition of the ticket are as per statutory requirement of Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 3 of Second Schedule of Carriage by Air Act,1972, which is “the passenger ticket shall constitute prima-facie evidence of the conclusion and condition of the contract of the carriage. The absence, irregularity or loss of the passenger ticket does
not affect the existence or the validity of the contract of carriage which shall none the less, be subject to these rules.” The condition of the statute become an agreement of the contract which are binding upon both the parties and the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement are absolutely same for web-Ticket,
E.ticket of Paper Ticket . The tickets were issued to the complainants are covered by the Carriage by Air Act 1972 which was enforced vide notification dtd. 30.3.1973. The condition of Carriage is printed in the ticket which is valid contract as per the International Air Transportation Association Rules and is bound on both the parties and various provision of Contract Act are also applicable before the forums and commissions as well . The Opp.Party No.4 & 5 are not authorized ticketing agent of them and Opp.Party No.4 & 5 are working through the mechanism of BSF (Billing and Settlement plan) and BSP is open to all airlines servicing in the counter. For IATA Accredited Agents in BSP country of operation are automatically illegible for participation in a BSP and that a new BSP commence operation in a country, all agents are notified by IATA and invite to participate and facilitate to simplify the selling and reporting and remitting procedure of IATA (International Air Transportation Association) and accredited Passengers Sales Agents as well as improve financial control and cash flow of BSP airlines. There is no agreement between Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. and Jet Lite India Limited for selling tickets , hence no principal- agent relationship exists. Ticketing is done through BSP link only. Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. is a web-portal which deals with booking of air tickets over the internet. Booking for the complainant were made by Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. on May 04,2009 and on 24.8.2009 at 1302 hrs IST the booking system send a system generated massage which is known as “dupe message” in 5QQ Remarks and 5H Remarks to Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. to revert back on the query, because there were two sets of simultaneous confirmed tickets for the same date and the same sector existed and the other said agent by M/S Rajyatayat (P) Ltd. and there was a time limit advised to revert to this message which was 2200 hrs on 26th Aug. and this message are reflects at the travel agent’s at the end through 5 QQ MSG. The cancelled tickets are still not put up for refund by Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. The another set of confirmed booking tickets which were made by M/S Rajyatayat (P) Ltd. which were also cancelled and this
tickets were put up for refund and processed through BSP link. They have no agreement between M/S Rajyatayat (P) Ltd. for selling tickets and hence no principal-agent relationship exists between them and ticketing is done through BSP only. Due to heavy rush in air travel during the said period, rescheduling of
the return tickets of the complainants were not possible and in such situation, is out of control of them and this does not amount to any deficiency of service. Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. was duly informed by them regarding cancellation of tickets and it is their duty to inform the complainant about that. There is no agreement between them and Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. for selling tickets and hence no principal-agent relationship exists between them and the ticketing is done through BSP link only and Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. is a web-portal which deals with booking and airline tickets through the internet. They have no any branch within the limit of this forum and their office at the airport is not a branch office; but only a help desk which being manned for facilitating the incoming and outgoing passenger and with help desk does not give any territorial jurisdiction to this forum and their website can also gave jurisdiction to this forum having website is available all over the world through internet. The allegations against them are false , frivolous , baseless and without any legal right. The complaiannt’s are not entitled to any relief from this forum or from them and the complaints is liable to be dismissed.
6) We have perused the pleading of all the parties and it is found that Opp.Party No.1,2,3 namely Jet Airways are not concerned with this dispute having Jet Lite flights do not belong to them which belong to Jet Lite (India) Ltd. On that view this forum, vide order dtd. 19.7.2013, struck out the names of Opp.Party No. 1,2,3 from this case. The complainant as well as Opp.Party No.4 & 5 admits that the concerned flight belong to Jet Lite (India) Ltd, Delhi . This forum also vide order dtd. 6.9.2010 impleded Jet Liite (India) Ltd, as Opp.Party No.6,7,8 . By filing written statement Opp.Party NO.6,7,8 admit that the tickets concerned are the tickets issued for their flight and whatever schedule of journey quoted in the complaint are the schedule journey of their flight which are journey from Kolkata to Port Blair on 20.9.2009 in the flight No. S 2319 bearing ticket No. S2/ETKT 705 3533484308 to 3533484311 and return journey from Port Blair to Kolkata vide flight No.S2320 bearing ticket No. S2/ET KT 705 3533484312 to 3533484315 on
28.9.2009. Thus , it is established that complainants purchased confirmed tickets from Opp.Party No.6,7,8 through Opp.Party No.5 applying internet process for the journey from Kolkata to Port Blair on 20.9.2009 vide tickets No. S2/ETKT 705 3533484308 to 3533484311 for their journey ,and also confirmed tickets vide tickets No.S2 ETKT 705 3533484312 to 3533484315 for their journey from Port Blair to Kolkata on 28.9.2009. The flight number of the flight from Port Blair to Kolkata was S2 320 and both flights belong to Opp.Party No.6,7,8 i.e. Jet Lite (India) Ltd; and Opp.Party No.6,7,8 admit that both the flights belong to them.
7) Opp.Party No.4,5 as well as Opp.Paty No.6,7,8 admit that the complainants arrived Kolkata from Guwahati in another flight and went to Kolkata airport and tried to board flight No. 319 of Jet Lite belong to Opp.Party No.6,7,8 and their tickets are ticket No. S2 ETKT 705 3533484308 to 3533484311 on 20.9.2009 for their journey from Kolkata to Port Blair, but the officials of Jet Lite Airline authority informed them that their air tickets were cancelled, and then they requested the said officials to provide information as to who cancelled their confirmed tickets and they also requested the said officials for sending them to Port Blair by alternative arrangement, but the latter refused to extend any co-operation. Opp.Party No.4,5 as well as Opp.Party No.6,7,8 further admits that the tickets were cancelled as because another travelling agency namely M/S Rajyatayat (P) Ltd. booked the confirmed tickets against the ticket numbers of the complainant for the said flight meaning thereby against the same ticket numbers two seats of confirmed tickets were issued by Opp.Party No.6,7,8 and that at the time of booking of the tickets by the complainants , Opp.Party No.4 & 5 did not know that the tickets were already issued by Opp.Party No.6,7,8 against the said ticket numbers through Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd., to another set of passangers.
(8) Opp.Party No.6,7,8 state that regarding cancellation of the tickets of the complainant, they informed Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd., namely Opp.Party No.4 & 5 beforehand , which they deny. Opp.Party No.6,7,8 has not adduced any evidence to prove the said plea. While Opp.Party NO.6,7,8 admit that they had not directly informed the complainants about cancellation of their tickets before they attempted to board the schedule flight, it must be held that Opp.Party No.6,7,8 had not informed Opp.Party No.4& 5 about cancellation of said tickets . The ground of cancellation of said tickets is double issue of tickets against the same numbers. We have gone through the terms and condition of the agreement of purchasing the tickets and found that Opp.Party No.6,7,8 have no right to cancel the tickets of purchaser of confirmed tickets on the ground of double issue of tickets .
(iii) Opp.Party No.6,7,8, in their written statement, take also another plea that they had no principal/ agent relationship with Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd. and ticket is done through BSP link only and for that reason they are not liable to pay any compensation for cancellation of tickets purchased through Yatra Online Pvt.Ltd.. It is found from the documents of Opp.Party No.6,7,8 that BSP link is a computer oriented internet process through which any travel agency can contact the ticket selling process of any airline company who has membership in BSP link. Thus, it is clear that Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. facilitated the complainant to purchase the concerned tickets reaching the tickets selling process to Opp.Party No.6,7,8, and Opp.Party No-6,7,8 issued the concern tickets as confirmed tickets to the complainants through Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. on 4.5.2009. Thus, Opp.Party No.6,7,8 cannot be allowed to deny their responsibility as to selling the said tickets to the complainants. We have also found that Opp.Party No.4,5 (Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd.) the travel agency through which any person can contract any airline company for purchase air tickets and in the process they send the value of the tickets directly to the account of the airline company. In the instant case , the complainants paid Rs.48,754/- the value of two sets of tickets ( journey from Kolkata to Port Blair and back journey from Port Blair to Kolkata) to Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. through ATM credit card of Complainant No.1 on 4.5.2009 and Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. also paid the said amount to Opp.Party No.6,7,8 ( Jet Lite (India) Ltd.) after deducting their commission from it. It is also seen that at the time of procuring the said tickets, the tickets were conformed tickets . So, apparently, it is seen that Opp.Party No.4,5 has done their part of duty in the sale process of said tickets which includes paying the value of tickets to Jet Lite (India) Ltd. (Opp.Party No.6,7,8). It is also seen that Opp.Party No.6,7,8 did not cancel the tickets after informing the Opp.Party No.4 & 5 as well as the complainants. Thus, it is clear that Opp.Party No.4& 5 were in dark about cancellation of the said tickets by Opp.Party No.6,7,8 side (Jet Lite (India) Ltd.). So, we have found that the Opp.Party No.4 & 5 are no way responsible for cancellation of said tickets, but Opp.Party No.6,7,8 are solely responsible for such act. Thus we hold that the act of cancellation of said tickets as done by Opp.Party No.6,7,8 is an act of blatant violation of aviation law and the principle of natural justice ,and such the said act is unlawful and amounts deficiency of service towards the complainants and for such deficiency of service,Opp.Party No-6,7,& 8 have to pay adequate compensation to the complainants.
9) The complainant side by adducing their evidence has succeeded to prove that they went to Kolkata on 19.9.2009 in Indigo Airways and for the said tickets they have paid value of Rs.8,520/- and they also booked tickets in Indian Airlines for their return journey from Kolkata to Guwahati on 28.9.2009 paying Rs.11,380/-. They have also succeeded to prove their schedule of journey as – journey from Guwahati to Kolkata by air on 19.9.2009 in Indigo Flight, and journey from Kolkata to Port Blair on 20.9.2009 in the flight of Jet Lite (Flight No- S319) and then journey from Port Blair to Kolkata through Jet Lite (Flight No- S320) on 28.9.2009 and journey from Kolkata to Guwahati through another airlines AIR India on 28.9.2009. They have also succeeded to prove by filing the tickets and invoice with them for paying Rs. 68,586.00 in total in purchasing all the tickets of the scheduled journey.
(i) It is found from the record that while the Jet Lite authority cancelled the tickets of the complainants of their journey from Kolkata to Port Blair airport and while they failed to make alternative arrangement of their journey they became compelled to cancel their journey to Port Blair and stay at Kolkata at their own expenses up to 28.9.2009 (date of their return journey from Kolkata to Guwahati in Air India Flight). It is also found from the record that Jet Lite Air Authority did not arrange for their stay at Kolkata from 20.9.09 to 28.9.09 and as a result they had to stay at Kolkata upto 28.9.09 spending an amount of Rs.9,500/- as a cost of rooms for 10 nights and to incur Rs.16,800/- as cost of fooding for 10 days and also Rs.3,980/- as taxi fares, and local convenience during their stay at Kolkata totaling Rs.29,280/- .As the complainants incurred that expenditure from their own pocket due to cancellation of tickets for the journey from Kolkata to PortBlair, the Jet Lite (India) Ltd. (Opp.Party No.6,7,8) liable to reimburse that amount to the complainant. We have already found that the complainant incurred an expenditure of Rs.68,586/- in total for purchasing the air tickets of the said schedule of journey but they failed to reach actual destination for the fault on the part of the Opp.Party No-6,7& 8.Hence Jet Lite (India) Ltd. (Opp.Party No.6,7,8) are liable to pay the said amount to the complainants.
(ii) The complainant is a service holder and he has to spend 10 days at Kolkata for no purpose due to fault of Opp.Party No-6,7 & 8, therefore, Jet Lite (India) Ltd. (Opp.Party No.6,7,8) is liable to pay him Rs.17,581/- as professional loss.
(iv) In the written statement Opp.Party No.6,7,8 take plea that they have no branch office at Guwahati and hence this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint to file by the complainant. This perception cannot be accepted having Jet Lite India) Pvt.Ltd. has also desk office at G.N.B.airport to maintain their business of carrying the passengers from Guwahati to different destination and from different destination to Guwahati. They admitted that they have desk office at Guwahati airport. It is found that the desk office maintains the business of Opp.Party No.6,7,8 at Guwahati i.e. carrying passengers from Guwahati to different station and from other stations to Guwahati in their flights. Thus , it must be presumed that the said desk office as the branch office of the Jet Lite India) Pvt.Ltd. (Opp.Party No.6,7,8). So , we hold that Jet Lite India) Pvt.Ltd.has a branch office at G.N.B International Airport , Borjhar, Guwahati. Therefore, we hold that this forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint filed by the complainants.
10) In view of above discussion , we are of view that Jet Lite (India) Pvt.Ltd. (Opp.Party No.6,7,8) are liable to pay the amounts as calculated above to the complainants, but Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd. ( Opp.Party No.4& 5) are not liable to pay the said amounts to the complainant.
11) For the result of illegal cancellation of tickets of the complainants in the forwarded journey i.e. journey from Kolkata to Port Blair , the complainants had to suffer from mental agony and felt putting them in harassment by the such illegal act of the Opp.Party No.6,7,8. For such harassment and mental agony Opp.Party No.6,7,8 are liable to pay atleast Rs.50,000/- to the complainants as compensation. Secondly, for no fault of the complainant, they have to prosecute the Opp.Party No.6,7,8 for issuance of direction to them to pay them compensation, and in that pursuit they had to spend good sum . Therefore, Opp.Party No.6,7,8 are liable to pay atleast Rs.20,000/- to the complainants as cost of the proceeding.
12) Because of what has been discussed as above, the complaint against Opp.Party No.4,5 (Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd.) is dismissed on contest, but against Opp.Party No.6,7,8 (Jet Lite (India) Pvt.Ltd.) is allowed on exparte and they are directed to pay Rs.68,586/-(Rupees sixty eight thousand five hundred eighty six)only along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint (9.12.2009) to the complainant as the cost of the tickets purchased by them for the schedule journeys and also to pay them Rs.29,280/- (Rupees twenty nine thousand two hundred eighty)only as cost of their stay at Kolkata from 20.9.2009 to 29.9.2009 and Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing harassment to them and for causing mental agony suffered by them, and also Rs.20,000/- as cost of proceeding to which they are jointly and severally liable. Secondly, they are also directed to pay an amount of Rs.17,581/(Rupees seventeen thousand five hundred eighty one)only to Complainant No.1 as professional loss. They are directed to pay the amounts within two months, in default of which , they are also liable to pay interest at the same rate
Given under our hands and seal of this forum on this day 30th Sep,2016.
Free copies of judgment be delivered to the parties.
(Md.S.Hussain)
President
(Mr.U.N.Deka)
Member
